Pages

Thursday, 25 August 2016

Mirror’s Edge: Catalyst isn’t quite the Mirror’s Edge sequel we were
hoping for. In fact, it’s not a sequel at all, but a complete
reboot. That may disappoint some, but honestly, the narrative
elements of the original game were rather threadbare to begin with,
so I’m not opposed to Catalyst wiping the slate clean and providing
a new take on the world and characters of Mirror’s Edge.

That’s
not to say Catalyst doesn’t echo many elements of the original in
terms of characters, world, story and themes. It does, but it
provides a new twist, fleshing out many of these elements in a way
the original never did. Well … sort of.

The
story of Catalyst (now told through game engine cut-scenes as opposed
to the animated scenes of the original) feels oddly incomplete. It
sees Faith tangling with the powerful KrugerSec Corporation, and a
nefarious plot to wrestle away the free-will of the unwitting
‘employs’ of the City of Glass.

There’s
a lot going on, and it’s clear a lot of work went into fleshing out
the world of Catalyst. Unfortunately, very little of this work is
evident through playing the core story. No, if you want to better
understand the world and the motivations of its characters, you
really need to dig into the collectible audio and document logs.

The
story is all there – at least in the sense that all the ‘key’
moments play out as you’d expect, taking the story neatly from A to
B to C. But it’s the moments between those key scenes – moments
that would serve to flesh out the world, situation and characters –
that are missing. Many times throughout the game, scenes would end
abruptly, as if they were cut short.

Many
times, I found myself feeling that chunks of the story had simply
been cut. This is particularly evident at the very end of the game,
when (mild spoiler) Faith finally regains her iconic tattoo. It’s
something that’s noted a couple of previous times throughout the
story, something that seems to hold great significance to Faith and
(I think) her Mother – yet it’s never expanded upon or explained.

In
addition to this, there’s the matter of Faith’s alias and a
mysterious runner sign – both of which are mentioned once yet
promptly forgotten. The story, particularly during the early stages,
sets up multiple potential plot points which then disappear entirely.

And
this feeling of being incomplete persisted throughout the
game, not just in terms of story. The background scenery feels
hastily put together, lacking the quality and polish of the rest of
the game. The various inhabitants of the City of Glass seem to
possess no more than three idle animations and are excessively cloned
throughout.

The
opening level/tutorial segment, in a neat contrast to the original
game, is set during a rainy night, yet it’s the only time you’ll
see rain in the entire game. There’s a couple of side missions
which set up the ‘hunter’ drones that patrol the rooftops as a
potential threat (and you even have an ability in your skill tree to
disable them) yet they don’t feature in the game at all.

There’s
just so much stuff like this littered throughout Catalyst that feels
cut short. And this is particularly true of the supporting cast. The
supporting cast of Catalyst is interesting, but the game does very
little with them. You meet a character called Birdman early in the
game who you assume will play a role within the core story. But
instead, he vanishes entirely after a couple of early training
missions. Another runner, Nomad, who you also feel will play a role,
also vanishes without a trace.

Your
mentor and father figure Noah seems like an interesting guy, but
barely has enough scenes to establish his relationship with Faith.
And then we have Dogen, a crime boss who deserves far more than the
limited scenes and missions he has. This is also true of Thane,
leader of the Black November terrorist group, who does play a key
role in the story, but also fades out of sight towards its
conclusion. Thankfully, the adorable hacker Plastic (and her pet
robot) get a little more attention.

It’s
frustrating to see such potentially interesting characters simply
vanish from the story or barely play a role. I can’t help but feel
there was far more planned for this story and these characters that
had to be cut, either due to budget or time constraints. And this
feeling is reinforced by those aspects of the world that either lack
polish, or are never expanded upon or used as it seems they were
intended.

I
don’t know what happened during the development of Catalyst, but it
really does feel like a lot of stuff was cut, forcing the developers
to stitch the story together as best they could in a way that still
made sense. It’s so frustrating when you take the time to delve
into the audio and document logs and see how much thought went into
building this world and characters … and how so much of it feels
wasted.

When
I reviewed Mirror’s Edge a while ago, I mentioned how I’d like to
see a more open-world in a potential sequel. And that’s exactly
what Catalyst delivers. As you progress through the story you’ll
unlock new areas of the City of Glass. It’s a large playground,
though it somewhat lacks variation. Each area does have its own
unique ‘look’ to it, but it’s not quite as pronounced as I
would have liked.

That
said, traversing this open city is an amazing rush, and exactly the
kind of expansion on the original game I was hoping for. And though
the core story and missions may feel incomplete, the developers seem
to have tried to make up for it with an abundance of open world side
content.

There’s
nothing particularly complex about the side content in Catalyst, with
nearly all of it consisting of a race between A and B. The bulk of
this is the delivery jobs and the ‘rush’ race challenges. But
there’s also a couple of more combat oriented side jobs, as well as
some fun platform puzzle style missions.

If
all you want to do is run then
Mirror’s Edge has you covered, with plenty to keep you busy during
and beyond the core story. It may be rather basic and repetitive
content, but it remains true to the heart of Mirror’s Edge – to
run, pure and simple.
And this is something that’s also nicely tied into its revamped
combat system, which I’ll talk about in a moment. But first, I do
need to say that the core story missions of Catalyst – the
scripted, crafted missions outside of the open world – aren’t
anywhere near as good as those in the original.

There are flashes of brilliance, moments when they do hit those dizzy
heights (sometimes quite literally). But on the whole, the missions,
whilst still good, lack the clever design and engaging moments of the
original. They’re not as elaborate, they lack variation in terms of
environments, and they don’t offer a comparable rush.

Also missing from the original is the use of guns. I know I’m in
the minority when I say I actually liked the gunplay of the original
game. There was something very satisfying about kicking a shotgun out
of the hands of an enemy, flipping it into the air, catching it on
its way down, and then blasting the f**ker in the face.

The limited ammo meant you couldn’t treat the game like a typical
shooter. Instead, you stayed on the move, grabbing a gun and taking a
shot, before discarding it and continuing on, all in one fluid
motion. But Catalyst does away with guns entirely, at least in terms
of player use.

The combat system has been overhauled, with a strong focus on
persistent movement. Keeping a running ‘flow’ going builds a
focus ‘shield’ that effectively makes Faith bulletproof and
immune to damage. But slowing down, stopping or taking hits will
deplete that shield rapidly.

And though Faith can’t use guns, certain enemies can, meaning it’s
important to stay on the move, using your mixture of light (fists)
and heavy (feet) attacks to take them out, one at a time, in one
continuous motion. I actually feel the game would have benefited by
not having guns at all, for either Faith or your enemies. The gun
toting enemies aren’t at all interesting to fight, and the game
really needed a greater variety of melee based foes with different
attack styles and weapons.

The introduction of third person ‘finishing’ moves was a concern
for some but honestly, you’ll barely see them at all. The combat
feels like it has an appropriate weight to it, and when you do chain
together your attacks as you traverse the environment it’s – just
as it was in the original – an absolutely fantastic feeling. In
fact, I’d say I enjoyed the combat in Catalyst more than in the
original.

Catalyst also introduces a new method for traversing the environment
– a magnetic grapple. It’s a fun addition, but can only be used
at very specific points, and I don’t think the game really needed
it at all. Oh, and don’t be worried by the skill tree system. You
can obtain all of Faith’s original moves within about twenty
minutes of play, so it’s really not an issue. But in terms of
overall movement, I think the original still offers the superior
experience. Movement in Catalyst feels more ‘loose’ and
forgiving, whereas the original required greater precision.

Graphically, Catalyst employs the similar stark, colourful style of
the original. Technically, the game is solid, with a constant 60FPS,
but it does suffer from some blurry textures and backgrounds, meaning
the game never appears quite as sharp or as vivid as the original.

Overall, despite all of my complaints, I still enjoyed the f**k out
of Catalyst. I never thought we’d see another Mirror’s Edge game
and though Catalyst may be far from perfect, it was great to step
back into Faith’s stylish shoes. I don’t know if we’ll get
another game. I hope so.

And I hope if we do, the developers have the time and budget to craft
the definitive Mirror’s Edge experience – a perfect blend of the
elaborate, diverse and cleverly crafted levels of the original, and
the expansive open world of the reboot. Not to mention a story that
does justice to its world and characters in a way that neither title
quite managed to achieve.

There’s still a lot for me to see and do in Catalyst, and it’s a
game I see myself playing for some time as I hunt down the last of
the collectibles and try to beat all of the various side challenges.
It’s also made me want to play through the original again.

Oh,
and I don’t know why they changed Faith’s face. It was a little
weird at first, but I soon adjusted. I guess it’s not really a big
deal or anything. If you’re a fan of the original, you really need
to play Catalyst. It’s not just more of the same. Though it may
somewhat lack the crafted quality of the original, it offers so much
more in terms of world, characters and extra content. Despite its
flaws, I highly recommend checking it out.

Thursday, 18 August 2016

Unless
you’re on PC, in which case you’re f**ked. After months of
teasing the upcoming Beta, it was suddenly announced that the PC
platform would not be supported. As someone who bought the original
Titanfall on release purely on the strength of its Beta, this is
extremely disappointing.

Titanfall
2 is one of the few games I am genuinely excited for this year. I
loved the mechanics of the original, particularly in terms of
movement. I was also impressed by the balance between infantry and
Titan combat, and the inclusion of AI grunts which I felt added a
degree of spectacle to the various maps and modes.

But
the game lacked content on release. It lacked variety. It lacked
customisation and personalisation options. It did address some of
these issues post-release with new maps, modes and a new ranking
system. But by the time these updates rolled out, the player base had
already been split by the DLC map packs, and player numbers dwindled
to the point where it was hard to find a fully populated match.

But
the core of the game was great, which is why I had (have?) such high
hopes for Titanfall 2. It was just a question of if they could refine
the existing mechanics, whilst building upon everything the original
did right.

The
announcement of a full single player story campaign in TF2 was
fantastic news. Titanfall suffered for its lacklustre ‘campaign’.
I really hope the campaign of Titanfall 2 expands and delves into the
Titanfall world in a way the original never did. Although I do hope
it doesn’t reduce the Militia and the IMC to a simplistic ‘good
guys’ and ‘bad guys’ situation.

Of
course, the bulk of our time with TF2 will be in multiplayer, and as
soon as the sign up for beta announcements appeared, I was first in
line. But instead, only days before the beta was due to go live,
those of us playing on PC were unexpectedly shafted.

And
that worries me. Perhaps it shouldn’t – Titanfall had a pretty
decent release on PC in terms of performance, but still … it’s
planted a seed of doubt in my mind. The ‘explanation’ of why
they’ve excluded PC also seems a little odd –

‘We
also haven’t done enough work to fully support our ‘Min Spec’
on PC yet. So, currently the PC game isn’t as easy to throw out for
testing as the console is, because of the additional variables and
configurations that we need to support.’

So
… two months prior to release and the game isn’t even supported
on a ‘min spec’ PC? Maybe I’m just being paranoid, but I find
that rather troubling. At least Origin has a decent refund policy, so
if it does release in a shitty state, I can get my money back.

So
I can’t play in this ‘Tech Test’ and that really f**king sucks.
But I can watch a lot of videos of it and form various impressions
which I can then rant about here!

It
does appear that the core movement mechanics of the original have
survived more or less intact, although it does appear slightly
slower, but this may simply be an issue of the video. The new
grappling hook ability seems like a nice addition to further boost
map traversal, but I am concerned by the maps currently on show.

They
don’t seem to offer the same complexity as those in the original
game, and the more open layouts doesn’t lend itself to wall
running. I loved bouncing from one wall to the next in TF and I’d
go entire matches without ever touching the ground. But that doesn’t
seem possible in any of the TF2 maps yet revealed.

I’m
also concerned by the lack of AI. I don’t know if we’ll see a
return of a traditional Attrition mode in TF2, but I hope we do. The
new Bounty Hunt appears to be a neat twist on that formula, but I
hope that’s not all there is in terms of AI inclusion. They were a
part of what made TF unique and it would be a shame to see them
relegated to a single mode. On that note, I hope Frontier Defence
returns – a horde style co-op mode of Players versus bots.

Also
of concern is the removal of the ‘burn card’ system in favour of
skill based perks. These added various fun little twists to every
match, that anyone could utilise. I’m not convinced this new,
apparently more limited system will be half as much fun.

They’ve
also removed the Titan timer, so not everyone is guaranteed to get a
Titan during a match. Instead, like the perk system, it’s tied to
player skill. My concern is that this will create a ‘rich get
richer’ style system, whereby any initial lead will quickly
compound and become unassailable.

My
only other concern, based on what I’ve seen, is how streamlined the
class and weapon customisation appears to have become. I’ve heard
that Pilot abilities determine visual appearance, and this also
applies to the new Titan models, which each pack their own unique
weapons almost like a selection of ‘Hero’ classes.

I’d
have much preferred a separate cosmetic, weapon and skill system that
allowed me to fully customise both my Pilot and Titan without various
abilities or weapons being tied to specific models.

Okay,
so what did I see that I actually liked? The new weapons look pretty
neat, and it seems that there’s a lot more to come. I liked the
look of the new abilities, each of which seems like it would be very
useful depending on the mode or map.

The
new game modes seem to offer a diverse range of experiences, which is
something the original lacked. And although I’m not entirely
enamoured with what we’ve seen of player/class customisation it’s
still better than what we had in the original.

The
new rodeo mechanic looks interesting, as it’s not simply about
dealing damage and can actually allow you to boost or repair friendly
Titans – which may encourage a degree of team play. And,
of course, there’s likely a lot more not yet revealed, so maybe I’m
worrying for nothing.

Overall
though, I do like what I’ve seen of Titanfall 2 and I still plan to
pick it up on release. But I do hope we get a beta of some form on PC
to put people’s minds at ease and to drum up interest in the title.
I don’t want to see the PC version shat out with little concern for
its long term player base. The fact they’re not doing map packs is
a great sign, but whether we’ll see any kind of DLC or, dare I say
it – microtransactions – remains to be seen. Hey, this is EA
we’re talking about.

Sunday, 14 August 2016

No
Man’s Sky has just released to a somewhat mixed reception. It’s a
game I’ve kept an eye on since its impressive reveal during an E3
stage demo back in 2014. The ability to seamlessly travel from
surface to space, with an emphasis on exploration and discovery in a
galaxy full of strange alien worlds and life.

Based
on what I’ve seen in various gameplay streams, No Man’s Sky
appears to deliver on that promise – you travel from one star
system to the next, exploring new worlds, cataloguing new life, with
the ultimate goal to reach the centre of the galaxy. Which is fairly
in line with my impression of the game from the early videos and
information.

I
say ‘impression’ because specific information on many aspects of
No Man’s Sky was, and still is, rather vague. I quite liked the
mystery that surrounded the project prior to release, but with little
information to go on, hype for the game rose based on player
expectation, not on solid fact.

Even
now, post-release, there are still aspects to the game that remain
unclear, particularly with regard to its multiplayer aspect. Clarity
is required. Personally, I’ve remained rather wary of No Man’s
Sky. The core aspects of exploration and discovery appealed to me,
but they depended heavily upon the complexity of the procedural
generation system.

Would
No Man’s Sky truly offer a diverse range of worlds, environments
and life as we saw in the limited glimpses of the pre-release videos?
Or would we see an obvious mechanical system at work, compiling
worlds and creatures from a limited range of assets? Unfortunately,
based on what I’ve seen, it appears to be the latter.

It
still looks like it might be fun, but not exactly £39.99 fun
based on the clearly limited content and the extremely basic systems
of trade, combat and alien interaction. There’s also a far more
heavy focus on ‘survival’ and inventory management than I was
expecting, and not what I was hoping for – at least not to this
degree.

No
Man’s Sky isn’t quite what many were expecting and many are
disappointed. To make the release situation worse, the game has
serious technical issues. The console version of the game seems
plagued by random crashes, and the PC version is very much f**ked for
a lot of people.

That
said, I’m still going to keep an eye on the game, on its progress,
its patches and future content. And maybe I’ll even pick it up in a
future sale if it’s reduced to a price I feel is more appropriate
for what’s on offer. But in the meantime, if I want to scratch that
space exploration itch, what better way than by returning to Space Engine.

I
first wrote about Space Engine in August 2012, but it’s undergone quite
an overhaul since then, most notably in terms of UI. The engine
itself is also far more stable and easy on performance than I recall.
If No Man’s Sky has disappointed you or if, like me, you’re
waiting to see if/when it improves, then I highly recommend checking
out Space Engine. If No Man’s Sky thinks it’s big and ambitious,
it’s got nothing on this.

Wednesday, 10 August 2016

Rise of the Tomb Raider is the sequel to the 2013 Tomb Raider reboot. That
was a solid and enjoyable – if somewhat forgettable – title that
didn’t quite hit the mark. But it was a fresh beginning for a new
take on an old series, one which I hoped would be built upon and
improved. And I’m pleased to say that Rise of the Tomb Raider (or
ROTR for short) does just that. Mostly.

I
enjoyed ROTR quite a bit, but I also came away a little disappointed.
I’d rate it as a better game than its predecessor, but it’s not
quite the step up I was hoping for. It gets a lot right though, and
actually addresses my key complaints about TR2013.

There’s
far more focus on exploration and puzzle solving in ROTR. There’s
actual tombs to raid,
believe it or not. Combat returns, but aside from a misguided
final mission, the combat segments are kept fairly short and sharp,
with far greater emphasis on stealth.

ROTR
features an enjoyable core campaign offering a nice variety of
locations and objectives. This is accompanied by several excellent
‘challenge’ tombs. Combined, these components provide a
satisfying and fun experience from start to finish. My only real
complaint about the core campaign is the somewhat lacklustre story
and supporting cast.

Although
I enjoyed seeing the story through, I do wish the developers would
realise that we don’t always need an ‘epic’ emotionally driven
adventure. Can’t we just have Lara going into tombs to steal shit
because it’s fun? And I really wish they’d stop trying to force a
main ‘villain’ for Lara to tangle with. But if you really feel
you must, at least try to make them interesting.

The
main villain in ROTR is a guy named Konstantin. Because he obviously
couldn’t just be called Jeff. But aside from his cool name,
he’s another generic, lame ass villain that’s just evil for the
sake of evil and for the sake of a dumb as f**k ‘boss’ battle
where Lara fights an attack helicopter. STOP IT. Seriously. STOP IT.
But I did enjoy the story, overall. Honest.

Whereas
Lara in TR2013 was more reactive, Lara in ROTR is the one calling the
shots and making shit happen. It’s good to see her evolving and
learning from her experiences. I just hope the developers will focus
more on her simply having fun in what she’s doing, without getting
too bogged down in conspiracy bullshit. They seem to be pushing for
this ancient order ‘Trinity’ to be future bad guys – which is
fine – but hopefully it won’t become the entire focus of Lara’s
next adventure.

The
gameplay of ROTR is pretty much the same as it was in TR2013. A
mixture of third person platform and puzzle solving, combined with a
slightly improved cover based combat system. There’s far more
variety to combat thanks to the selection of weapons and ammo types,
plus the addition of one-shot craftable items such as smoke and
explosive grenades, or proximity mines.

The
stealth system has also seen a bit of an overhaul, with a variety of
silent takedown animations. It’s still easy as fuck, but at least
it’s fun and offers a varied range of options in terms of how you
can approach the combat encounters. And, like I said, ROTR is far
more restrained with its combat (although the final mission gets a
bit over the top). It really does feel that they got the balance
between combat and exploration right this time.

So
where else does the game stumble? They’ve continued with an
experience/skill system which doesn’t really bother me, but all the
crafting/collectible nonsense was way too much. It essentially turns
the open hub areas into little more than collectathon marathons, as
you scramble from one resource node to the next, trying to scrape
enough components together to upgrade your gear. They really need to
tone that shit down.

The
game also pads out its content with a series of mostly dumb and
pointless ‘challenges’ – such as tossing chickens into a pen.
Seriously. STOP IT. There’s also a few extra narrative driven side missions,
but these aren’t much better. In fact, none of the additional side
content outside of the main challenge tombs are worth bothering with
unless you really want to hit that achievement happy 100% completion.
If you can ignore that, and just focus on the core content, you’ll
probably have a much better time.

Outside
of the main game, there’s a new Expeditions mode which replaces the
silly multiplayer of TR2013. It’s essentially a challenge mode with
objectives and scoreboards, with a
points based card system providing various modifiers. It’s a neat
addition, offering extended play beyond the core game. There’s also
some DLC content which includes a couple of okay story based
missions, one of which actually has a more interesting boss fight
than the core game. There’s also a ‘survival’ mode (sort of)
called Endurance. It’s a cool idea, but rather undercooked. I’d
be interested to see it return in the future in an improved, expanded
form.

Graphically,
ROTR is a great looking title with fantastic scenery and attention to
detail, although they seem to have lost the visual progression Lara
suffered in TR2013 – I suppose as a result of being able to switch
outfits as you please. Performance is solid, so no complaints there.

So
yeah, this is a step up from TR2013, but it still doesn’t quite hit
that mark and become something I’d rate as essential. They get more
right than wrong, but there’s still too much dragging it back down.
The lame villain and predictable story. The generic and dull side
missions. The padded out crafting and upgrade system.

I
probably sound a bit irritated by Rise of the Tomb Raider. And I
guess I am, in way, despite rather enjoying it. It is a step
up from TR2013, but only a small step. It still feels like the series
is being constrained by what’s ‘expected’ of it. As if it has
to provide this ‘epic’ adventure worthy of the Tomb Raider name
and character. But it doesn’t.

Just
give us tombs. Give us cool, interesting and clever environmental
puzzles. Let Lara explore shit and delve into ancient ruins just
because she loves it. Because we love it too. I don’t even need a
f**king story. Lara raids tombs. Because she’s the f**king Tomb
Raider. It really doesn’t need to be more complicated than that.

Monday, 8 August 2016

Wednesday, 3 August 2016

Batman: Arkham Knight is a sadly disappointing conclusion to the Arkham
series. But though it may not be as good as Asylum or City, Knight is
still a pretty fun game, and certainly worth playing if you’re a
fan.

That’s
the real problem with Knight. Everything it does, Asylum and City
simply did better. Be it story, missions, or side content, what’s
here isn’t bad at all – it’s just not as good. The
gameplay sees arguably a slight improvement, with several small
tweaks and additions to combat – but it doesn’t play
substantially differently to City.

And
despite these additions, Knight has very few, if any, memorable
fights or encounters. In fact, none of it is particularly memorable
at all. Too much of the content in Knight is forgettable. Too much of
it feels like unnecessary padding.

The
main story, aside from a couple of notable moments, isn’t very
engaging. Neither Scarecrow or the mysterious Arkham Knight make for
particularly effective villains. You hardly see or encounter
Scarecrow throughout the entire game, and the Knight spends the
majority of his time having a tantrum over the radio like an angry
toddler. There’s very little sense of menace.

The
best aspect to the main story is something I can’t talk about
without spoiling it. So I won’t. It involves the return of a
familiar face. And without them, the narrative aspects would have
fallen entirely flat.

Considering
this was the final entry in the series, I expected more from its
narrative, especially in terms of classic characters who either don’t
feature in the game at all, or don’t feature nearly as much as they
should. Catwoman, for example, was a great addition to City, but in
Knight she barely features (she’s not a part of the core story at
all) and simply f**ks off until the very end (and only if you bother
collecting all of the Riddler trophies).

I
expected Knight to bring together all of the heroes and villains
we’ve fought with and against throughout the series. But even those
who do feature are largely relegated to the disappointing side
content. Penguin and Two-Face, for example, do return, but the
missions involving their capture are short, repetitive and wholly
unsatisfying. There’s a few extra narrative driven side missions,
but nothing that stands out.

The
bulk of the side content is focused on the fight against the Arkham
Knight’s militia – taking down enemy watchtowers, road blocks and
disabling bombs. Some of these provide a neat fight, but they still
get pretty tedious and repetitive towards the end.

The
concept of all of Batman’s villains teaming up to stop him makes
for a (potentially) great final act, and a chance for an epic final
showdown involving all the good and bad guys we know and love.
Instead, many characters who you might expect to see don’t appear
at all, and many who do are severely underused.

As
with the previous Arkham games, the open world is host to many
Riddler puzzles. But even these feel less enjoyable. With over 200
riddles to solve, there’s clearly a case of quantity over quality.
I’d have preferred far less trophies but with more elaborate
challenges to collect them.

And
what’s really frustrating, is that in order to get the ‘true’
ending, you need to collect them all. I did, but honestly, the pay
off really isn’t worth it. Even the full ‘true’ ending to
Arkham Knight is a short, unsatisfying end to the series that’s met
with more of a shrug than a cheer.

So
much of the content in Knight feels uninspired and by the numbers.
There’s nothing inherently wrong with any of it. It’s just too
bland and forgettable. But if I had to pick the ‘worst’ aspect of
Arkham Knight, I’d have to go with the drone ‘tank battles’
which are far more tedious than challenging.

I
suppose the question is, given that in just about every area, Knight
is inferior to both Asylum and City, what does it offer that those
games can’t? The answer – the Batmobile. I actually liked the way
the Batmobile is integrated into the gameplay and open world of
Arkham Knight. It serves not simply as a form of transport, but
another gadget you will employ to advance through missions or solve
puzzles.

Irritating
tank battles aside, the Batmobile is a neat addition to the game, and
tearing through Gotham in the vehicle is a lot of fun, even if you
have to suspend your disbelief somewhat at the ‘non-lethal’
damage – I’m pretty sure smashing into someone at 90mph and
electrocuting them isn’t just going to give them a nasty headache.

But
the Batmobile isn’t as integrated as much as I would have liked.
Aside from a main mission early on that involves some clever gameplay
both in and out of the Batmobile (or by operating it remotely) very
few missions really take advantage of the vehicle or its
capabilities.

As
in the previous Arkham games, Knight has an extensive selection of
bonus content in the form of character and Batmobile skins, short
extra missions and a range of challenge maps. There’s plenty here
to keep you busy, and I actually quite enjoyed the ‘race’
challenges a lot.

I
don’t really have much more to say about Arkham Knight. I could
have probably just written ‘it’s like City, but not as good’ if
I was feeling particularly lazy. Because that’s really all it is.
It’s a solid and enjoyable game, but a game that’s unfortunately
preceded by two far superior titles.

Knight
doesn’t really build upon or combine the best of Asylum or City. It
plays it too safe, treads old ground and doesn’t fully commit to
new ideas or gameplay. Which wouldn’t be so bad if the story
provided a satisfying conclusion to the series. Unfortunately, it
doesn’t do this either, with a lacklustre plot, ineffective
villains and extremely poor use of a great supporting cast.

Though
an enjoyable title when judged on it own merits, Knight is a
disappointing end to a fantastic series. But if you’re a fan of
Asylum or City, I’d still recommend checking it out. The PC version
seems to be pretty much fixed now (aside from the occasional
framerate drop) so don’t be afraid to pick it up on sale.